Topic: Bitcoin 100: Developed Specifically for Non-Profits - page 34. (Read 262771 times)

*bump*

Just had a Skype call with Amy and Pradeep of the Primate Education Network. Their fiscal sponsor http://trustforconservationinnovation.org/ does the donation receiving and processing for them, and handles quite a few charities. Amy and Pradeep want to try to convince their sponsor to accept bitcoins, but mostly had some questions regarding legal issues and regulatory stuff. Like, whom would any financial disputes be handled with if they start taking bitcoin, etc. The chat went well, and they'll take all the information they discussed with me to the trust. They also asked if they could get KhanAcademy to talk to their trust to answer any questions regarding issues one might run into when accepting bitcoins as a charity. I send Khanacademy an e-mail asking if they would object to being contacted.

In the mean time, I know we're all busy with voting for me in the Bicoin Foundation elections (except for Jason you backstabing bastard  ), but we should probably give a yes or no to some of the charities we've been questioning recently. I'll take the loud silence is no objections I guess.

Received e-mail from Primate Education Network:


Suggestions for what I should ask about? The only concern is hat their domain is fairly new (2012)

While it is possible for people to use this to support charities, it is just as useful to use Ebay for the purpose. And nobody would claim that Ebay is a charitable organization.

Wow, thank you for the valuable insights!
It's great to have a pro here! :-)

Ente

Apologies, for I couldn't get my head wrapped around the concept. This is not a dis toward the project or its owner. If anything, its a dis at myself for not being able to get my head...

If the time comes, I've founded 501(c)3 organizations myself before and I can help.  My most recent one uses e-commerce to support other charities, so its not too dissimilar from what Bitcoin100 is doing (though BTC100 is much simpler).  I'll send you some resources on setting everything up, if you'd like, Rassah.  The longer you can keep it informal though, the better in my opinion.  

The turning point when you may want to consider setting up an official tax-exempt organization should be when charities start running into problems accepting the money you're donating because they can't account for it without jeopardizing their own tax-exempt status.  It depends a lot on the country that the non-profit lives in, but in many places including the U.S., charities have to prove that they are "publicly" supported.  Hence they need to document the persons they receive donations from and their respective amounts.  For small organizations, receiving the majority of their support from one particular person or entity can constitute "private" support which can change their designation to a private foundation.  Private foundations are taxed on donations and income similarly to for-profit corporations, albeit at a reduced rate.  

Most international organizations that want to do fundraising in the U.S. do end up getting a 501(c)3 in the U.S and establishing themselves as a public charity.  The IRS laws regarding sending money overseas to NPOs tightened up a lot after 9/11 so pursuing big donations from U.S. corporations and the like practically requires 501(c)3 exempt status.  Anyway, this is a pretty complex area of law in the U.S. so i'll leave it at that.  

By the way, I agree with you Rassah that this could get rather large.  That's what happens to good ideas, after all.

   He the man!


The table is quite special     but concentrate on the more important issue above 

Tell me more 

I can't believe it's been 2 years already...

Although a nice concise explanation, I'm sure the post would be much larger if keystroke asks you about Pinkie Pie.  I reread that episode last night and am still laughing my ass off.

Yes, I'll be watching this thread closely so feel free to ask here or in message. I check the forums obse^H^H^H^H several times per day.

I have a coffee table. It's nice. We salvaged it from a junk heap, and it was old, wooden, and nasty looking. Hubby sanded it down, spray painted the legs, crossbars, and underneath with grey hammered look spray-paint, making it look like cement, and used black shiny square tile all around the sides and top of the table edge. In the untiled center is a large clear piece of glass, and under the glass is a custom $300 piece of art. It is indeed NSFW, though in the say you would see NSFW art all over Italy or Greece. The table remains covered most of the time. Years ago someone took a picture of me laying on a couch by this table (dressed, of course), and this picture got out on the web. Once in a wile it has been used to poke fun at me, or as an example of how I am a bad or immoral person, ever since. Although slightly annoying, it doesn't really bother me. It's a nice table.

As it stands now, I don't believe Bitcoin 100 is in danger of abiding my any strict rules/laws/guidelines. But the moment we do scale up, if that's the next course of action, then we may explore the 501(c)3 route. Apologies for carefully using my words in that previous sentence(s). The intent was not meant to cloak anything nefarious.

For starters, having a standalone website is probably a must.


The website works fine, keystroke. I/we just feel that more information from you is desirable since Rassah raised possibly a valid point, but I wasn't too sure. I, personally, have no problem with your org. We want to just make sure there's no conflict with our supporters.

Thank you kindly for providing your post a couple posts up from this one. If anybody has any questions, be feel free to ask keystroke. I'm sure he'll address any and all concerns.

What about donating to Ed Snowden? https://wikileaks.org/freesnowden

Even though Bitcoin100 is very loosely organized and probably falls under the category of "hobby" at the moment, I worry that using any funds to pay for services or purchase items might push us over some line (in the eyes of regulatory agencies). As you mention, BTC sent to the vanity address have thus far only been held on behalf of others until worthy charities have been chosen and I doubt any red flags have been raised as of yet.

I am also a US citizen, BTW.

Does the link no longer work for you? It should be up at www.neuroethics.com.

Below are the abstracts two talks given by David Pearce. The ideas discussed do not require any religious or political affiliation (e.g. they are fully compatible with atheism). Some of the terms are technical -- "zombies" is used in the philosophical https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_zombie rather than undead sense.

Are any other transhumanist charities accepting bitcoin? It seems to be a natural fit.

Accelerating technological progress leads some futurists to predict the imminent end of the human era and the dawn of posthuman superintelligence. But what is superintelligence? How does intelligence relate to sentience? What are the Explanatory Gap, Moravec's Paradox, and the Binding Problem? Will nonbiological machines ever be more than zombies?

This talk explores three different scenarios for the major evolutionary transition in prospect.

In the first scenario, biological humans will rewrite our genetic source code, recursively self-edit our own minds, and bootstrap our way to full-spectrum superintelligence. Mastery of our reward circuitry will deliver life based on information-sensitive gradients of bliss.

In the second, Kurzweilian scenario, cybernetic brain implants will enable humans to fuse our minds with artificial intelligence; and also allow humans to scan, digitise and "upload" ourselves into a less perishable substrate. In digital nirvana, the distinction between biological and nonbiological machines will effectively disappear.

In the third scenario, most closely associated with mathematician I.J. Good and The Singularity Institute, a combination of Moore's law and the advent of recursively self-improving software-based minds will culminate in an ultra-rapid Intelligence Explosion and an era of nonbiological superintelligence. Posthuman superintelligence may or may not be human-friendly.

How strong is the supporting evidence for each of these prophecies?

Genetic change in biological humans is slow. Progress in digital computing is fast. Software run on serial, programmable digital computers is executed exponentially faster (cf. Moore's Law); it's copyable without limit; it runs on multiple substrates; and it can be rapidly edited, tested and debugged. Singularitarians like Ray Kurzweil or SIAI's Eliezer Yudkowsky prophesy that human programmers will soon be redundant because AI run on digital computers will undergo accelerating cycles of self-improvement (cf. Kurzweil's Law of Accelerating Returns). Artificial, greater-than-human nonbiological intelligence will swiftly be succeeded by artificial posthuman superintelligence.

This talk examines, and then discounts, the prospect of a "robot rebellion". Biological humanity is on the brink of a Biointelligence Explosion. Humans are poised to exploit "narrow" or "weak" AI to enhance our own code in a positive feedback loop of mutual enhancement. Starting with individual genes, then clusters of genes, and eventually hundreds of genes and alternative splice variants, a host of recursively self-improving organic robots ("biohackers") will modify their own source code and modes of sentience: their senses, their moods, their motivation, their world-simulations, their cognitive apparatus and their default state of consciousness. As the era of open-source genetics unfolds, tomorrow's biohackers will use high-level gene editing tools, insertion vector applications, nonviral gene-editing kits, and user-friendly interfaces to add, delete, edit and customize their own legacy code in a positive feedback loop of cognitive and emotional enhancement. Recursively self-improving biological humans are going to bootstrap their way to full-spectrum superintelligence - and indescribable bliss.

Hey, bud, yes! We need more clarification on http://neuroethics.com/ as you suggested to us below. Also, I'm curious as to why the link no longer works or was that a PM link via Rassah?


Bitcoin 100 doesn't have a hard line in sand as to what ideas are funded, but there is one for religious and political organizations. A majority of our funds were amassed based on that premise, thus not wanting to renege on our commitment.

Any insight would help us make a more informed decision as to whether funding http://neuroethics.com/ is prudent.

Bruno Kucinskas

I'm one of the founders -- is there anything I can help with?